Doom Wiki:Central Processing/2020

Codex entries
So do we break down and keep these, or go through and paraphrase them all into prose about the levels? They do contain a lot of information that we are currently missing in any form so I'm certainly not just wiping out the revisions immediately. --Quasar (talk) 19:23, 12 February 2020 (CST)


 * I have paraphrased or disbursed info from all of these as of this evening. --Quasar (talk) 21:47, 16 March 2020 (CDT)

Problem edits 20200303
The following edits are verbatim copyvio and based on leaked information from unintended early publication of the Dark Horse book, The Art of Doom Eternal: --Quasar (talk) 07:24, 3 March 2020 (CST)
 * Maykr:
 * Dread knight:
 * Arch-vile (Doom Eternal):
 * Marauder:
 * Gladiator:
 * Revenant (Doom Eternal):
 * We can (and should) remove the offending bits. Does anything else need to be done first? --Gez (talk) 09:56, 3 March 2020 (CST)

Review backlog
For those that are curious I'm quite busy trying to enjoy Eternal while still having duties at my job. This is why the review backlog is getting very large. Note that many of the currently unreviewed revisions contain verbatim copyvio from codex entries. All of this needs to be rewritten. --Quasar (talk) 03:17, 27 March 2020 (CDT)

Carlos filter
These edit attempts triggered the abuse filter to block an IP address and warn another. I've reverted the block because I don't see any vandalism in these contributions. I'm not sure on which word the filter tripped. --Gez (talk) 10:11, 30 March 2020 (CDT)


 * The "ass" in Carcass appears to trigger it but it was supposed to require another profanity on the line as well. I've axed that part of the rule entirely since I can't figure out my own logic any more at this point. --Quasar (talk) 12:37, 30 March 2020 (CDT)

Discord
Hello everyone, I am CIA391, most well known from a wiki called Halopedia. I am here to propose Discord for use with the wiki as I believe it may be very beneficial to the progress of the Doom wiki, and be easier for new users to use and discuss stuff with other users and admins.

In my experience on Halopedia, Discord has really helped the wiki shine over the last few years. Getting in new editors, discussing projects fast, and well in general just building a community round the wiki and the franchise we love the information on. I also find its very accessible compared to IRC, users when given the chance chose Discord over the existing IRC channel we had set up.

This is a few discords that have done quite well for being wiki discords just to show a few that have had benefited to the discords existing. This is merely me showing that discords based on Wikis can work. And well there is many more.
 * Halopedia Discord Server Basics
 * Runescape wiki Discord basics
 * Minecraft wiki Discord basics
 * Mario wiki Discord basics

And well I found a few folks are really finding Discord to be a great place to discuss Doom at the moment, so I just thought it would be a great chance to get a Doom Wiki Discord started. Regardless thanks for reading my suggestion.-CIA391 (talk) 10:25, 1 April 2020 (CDT)
 * Hi there CIA, and thanks for stopping by the Wiki. I agree that Discord is a great tool for discussing things over. That being said, DoomWiki at the moment does not use one, nor does it use IRC - Reason being is that many users have their own time tables, being spread all over the world. The users with full editorial rights are only a bunchful, and DoomWiki tries to adher to the Wikipedia standards for a lot of the time - Mostly in terms of presenting encyclopedic knowledge. I hope this helps! -- Redneckerz (talk) 16:23, 12 May 2020 (CET)


 * Actually, #doomwiki is actively used, albeit in fits and spurts. --Xymph (talk) 09:57, 12 May 2020 (CDT)


 * Perhaps the fact this is news for one of our recent heavy contributors explains why #doomwiki is so quiet…
 * FWIW, I'd probably, reluctantly, connect to a Doomwiki Discord if someone created one. But I'm a grumpy old person and I'm quite happy with IRC.
 * — Shambler (talk) 09:02, 13 August 2020 (CDT)


 * Personally I never liked things like IRC or AIM, and Discord just seems to me to be the same thing but as a proprietary format hosted on a corporation's own servers. --Gez (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2020 (CDT)


 * Hi CIA391, welcome to the site.


 * The idea that Discord needs promotion seems odd to me. :>  Hasn't it been the fastest-growing outlet for several years?  Nowadays, I would think anyone seeking a fan community would look for social media feeds first, before a forum or wiki.


 * Regarding Doom specifically, I mostly agree with Redneckerz and Gez. The wiki is not primarily about building a community &mdash; we had preexisting locations for that, such as doomworld.com and iddqd.ru &mdash; it is about the final published product, about research and accuracy.  Responding to anything in real time is usually harmful, a form of .  It's always better to think and investigate before posting, sometimes extensively, to ensure another user doesn't have to repeat the work later.  As said above, some wiki editors use IRC regularly, but many do not, and it doesn't seem to hinder anything (excepting rare cases where some urgency can exist, e.g. server downtime, harassment complaints).


 * More broadly, many active doomwiki.org contributors are also free content adherents. Some don't even use Windows.  The accessibility you mention is arguably a bad sign, because it means there's lots of money for software development, and where do you suppose that comes from?


 * All that said, I have heard of successful Discord projects within the Doom community (Joy of Mapping, DSDA3). For instance, gameplay content and walkthroughs for our newer games still have a lot of holes, and I suspect those players tend to use the wiki less often than our retrogamers do.  If someone wanted to coordinate that content addition, it would be a substantial tangible benefit to doomwiki.org.  Just don't expect to receive any sort of linking or other formal approval in return, for the reasons given above.  HTH. Ryan W (living fossil) 13:32, 5 June 2020 (CDT)

ZDoomGL (v1)? ZDoomGL (Kokak)? - Seperating the two versions
I am about to overhaul the ZDoomGL (v1) page before starting on Timmie's version. Because that will involve creating a new page, i like to ensure which terminology is considered acceptable Therefore i present this in a general page first, seeking other editor's opinions.

A talk page was created yesterday here - ZDoomGL talk after i changed the ZDoomGL page to ZDoomGL (v1). Despite doubts, i pushed this forward without prior discussion, resulting in the above page discussion. I should have made a Talk page first.

My intent was (and is) on providing clarity through the introduction of the (v1) (in brackets) and (v2) monikers, despite such not being historically 100% accurate See the Talk page for more info as to why i prefer (v1) and (v2).

Summary:
 * I derived at the given name by the following: Kokak's version targets ZDoom 1.x, Timmies ZDoom 2.x. So naturally, v1 would be a good reference (For us) that its based on ZDoom 1.x. It should be short as to not detract too much from the name, and functional - so v1 to me was the natural deduction. To make it more distinct, i felt the brackets made the most sense there. I felt this was the most elegant way of labeling them with the least amount of harm done.
 * Gez suggested to differentiate the two as ZDoomGL (Kokak) and ZDoomGL (Timmie).
 * One compromise would be to reference it as ZDoomGL (Kokak) | ZDoomGL so that it still shows as ZDoomGL in the text. On the mainpage, it would obviously be ZDoomGL (Kokak).

If this has to be discussed in the Talk page instead, then i apologize for bringing it here.

Open to hear opinions. -- Redneckerz (talk) 11:10, 12 May 2020 (CET)

Speedrunning record tables
Previous discussions here, here and here; starting a new topic in case the 2019 topics ever get archived.

I've commenced work on scripting speedrunning info and record tables from Compet-n and DSDA. Focusing on the former now, as a sufficiently usable and documented appears to be still some ways off.

Planned phases:
 * 1) Add/update speedrunner (stub-)pages for linking from record tables (mostly completed).
 * 2) Update the category tables for the IWADs (completed). Since Compet-N allows only seven PWADs, it seems sensible to compile the same tables for those too. But that would result in huge articles with gazillions of links, which may be unwise from usability and/or technical viewpoints. Any suggestions on how to structure them; perhaps into separate articles per category? perhaps collapse them by default, like on Linedef type? – or confirmation that it's no problem?
 * 3) Update record tables for the WADs as whole (completed).
 * 4) Update record tables for all individual maps (completed).
 * 5) Update record tables for all pertaining speedrunners.

Feedback welcome. --Xymph (talk) 05:31, 8 June 2020 (CDT)


 * Full support from me &mdash; should greatly improve an underdocumented area. These phases appear exhaustive of the data we've ever seriously considered adding.  I endorse  that map automation is a victim of its own success: any other procedural update must become automated, because humans can't keep pace.  :D


 * It sounds like #3 and #4 are two steps each, because COMPET-N vs DSDA output will be disjoint. A vaguely related thread is here.


 * Is #2 even worth doing? I'm not a fan of articles simply parroting another site without adding any original insights or integration, which we then have to keep synced forever.  The lists were created in January 2005 when our scope was still totally unclear; we aren't normally bound by nebulous precedents from that period.  IMO the long-term goal should be replacing each with an explication of routing principles, any tactics specific to the style, and a historical summary including key innovators and landmark runs.


 * If we must have lists, there should be no technical issue regarding size. This still loads OK with templated links at varying levels of recursion (which these won't have) and many more rows.  Others will need to say how many views/searches the pages receive in their current condition, and whether Google interprets hundreds of similar links as a parked domain.    Ryan W (living fossil) 13:16, 8 June 2020 (CDT)


 * Yes, #3/4/5 will have separate tables per demo repo. #5 would probably remain limited to the IWADs, like they are now. Your goal for #2 sounds worthwhile, but could be a long way off. Meanwhile, if there are lists, they might as well be updated after all these years. For me they would be a good target to learn and understand how the Compet-n database tables fit together, and to get my scripts and queries correct. If and when the category articles get rewritten per your proposal, the record tables could always be moved into adjacent or hierarchical subpages. --Xymph (talk) 09:21, 10 June 2020 (CDT)


 * Fair point &mdash; I hadn't thought about the instructional aspect. :>


 * Limiting #5 to IWADs would have been controversial a decade ago. I guess we'll find out whether that departed with Win9x.  :>  To first approximation, I'd agree with people who say IWAD records are far more impressive due to the larger player pool.  OTOH a few were still submitting PWAD improvements last I looked.  HTH / KUTGW.  Ryan W (living fossil) 11:31, 10 June 2020 (CDT)

&#8592; &#8592; &#8592; Step 2 is ready for deployment, pending the outcome of some data discrepancy checks by Fx, so I proceeded with #3 first. The script for #4 is nearly ready too, but meanwhile I'd like to solicit input on the table style for #5. Invented by Jartapran it uses layout/styling/coloring that I can reproduce in the next script, but if there is to be any discussion about refining (or even overhauling) it, then I would rather have that now before I program something that needs to be changed soon after. Personally I'm fine with maintaining this table style, but if anyone isn't then this is a sort of "speak now or forever hold your peace" moment. ;) --Xymph (talk) 07:42, 21 June 2020 (CDT)


 * More progress already! Regarding #3, the bot has already passed all the unit tests I could find in my old notes, so I guess I approve?  (People should examine my original implementation  before deciding I know what I'm talking about.  :7


 * Regarding #5, other related suggestions are here, here, here, and here . Arguably they are irrelevant now that a solid prototype exists.  :>  Still thinking about the layout details though.    Ryan W (living fossil) 10:01, 21 June 2020 (CDT)


 * I'm fine with the table style (FWIW &mdash; definitely no graphic designer), and I dimly remember a consensus forming for this layout among users actually helping with tabulations back then. With that said, some miniscule suggestions:
 * New COMPET-N presents episode runs and movies as "map slots", rather than entire distinct categories as . Would it therefore make sense to tack those records on to the bottom where present?
 * Should an "all time" column be added to the summary table? It feels misleading in some cases to simply report a zero, e.g. Yonatan Donner.
 * The tables are unevenly spaced in some skins. (Ignore this one if it's my calcified browser acting up.)
 * Change runs &rarr; styles in the footnote.
 * HTH, and thanks again. Ryan W (living fossil) 17:13, 22 June 2020 (CDT)
 * I'm not sure about the coloring -- when I see tables with green, orange, and red elements in them I just intuitively read the colors to mean "good, average, bad" which isn't really the theme going for here. It'd help if each of the IWAD had a strong connection to one color, but all the title screens are dominated by the color red while level color themes are all over the place. That said I'm not personally interested in the speedrunning side of things, so feel free to ignore this objection. --Gez (talk) 04:19, 23 June 2020 (CDT)


 * I see your point. With the script advanced far enough the generate tables – more work is needed to make it update player articles – it is very easy to produce color scheme variations, thanks to schemecolor.com. Since the original scheme is somewhat pastel-like, I searched for similar schemes, and also collected some via the site's Related feature. Please everyone (not only Gez) review and let me know what you like/dislike. Colors from different schemes can be combined into a new one, in new orders. If you want me to try them, list the four color values and I'll add them to the page. --Xymph (talk) 08:01, 10 July 2020 (CDT)


 * Given the deafening silence I compiled a scheme with the following "rules": no red/yellow hues; each of the four colors sufficiently distinct from the others and from the gray header and white totals footer, without jumping out of the page; the same group for Doom1&2 and another for Final Doom, with the latter (more difficult?) title in each group having the darker hue. The resulting scheme uses green and blue. One or more colors may be insufficiently distinct for viewers with some form of colorblindness, but that is a separate topic.
 * If no objections pop up soon, I'll be using this scheme for all speedrunners (with records on the IWADs). I've also dropped the spaces from the category totals ("4/1/0/4") so they fit without wrapping. --Xymph (talk) 06:47, 13 July 2020 (CDT)


 * Hi, Xymph! Seeing that you're in the process of automating this stuff, I wanted to point out that there was an addition in the charts of Jim Leonard (Xit Vono). The total amounts of current records are listed below the heading (UV speed 17, NM speed 41 etc.). If people find that feature useful, I guess you might want to add it to the script. Whatever you do, thank you for your work on this area! :) (If this thing has been brought up already, my apologies. I haven't had much time to follow the wiki lately.) --Jartapran (talk) 13:03, 13 July 2020 (CDT)


 * Hey, thanks for the heads-up! While I had looked at that article, so far I glanced over that one additional total per category, given that Adam Williamson('s records table) is my primary guinea pig. :) I would eventually have noticed when updating/diffing Xit Vono's tables with my script output, but it's better to take into account now already. --Xymph (talk) 14:12, 13 July 2020 (CDT)

When the fastest posted demo on COMPET-N is from Competition Doom, do you intend to link that in place of a DOS demo? It's such a rare situation that I assumed "yes" because you'd otherwise be generating an entire parallel set of tables. But that's only an assumption until I ask. :> HTH. Ryan W (living fossil) 09:07, 28 June 2020 (CDT)


 * CnDoom is a separate database, so I wasn't considering it until now. I do have access to it and see it holds only 105 rows. Queries can't stretch across databases but I could combine entries in the script(s), although it would be a bit awkward. However, I have no idea whether that would make sense, due to unfamiliarity with the whole competition scene. So I'd like to see more input and have to consult with Fx before attempting that. --Xymph (talk) 10:27, 28 June 2020 (CDT)


 * Fx let me know (but seems too shy to post himself ;) ) that he's not in favor of mixing CnDoom in with Compet-n, is concerned that it might confuse people. So I am not investing further time/energy into this for now. --Xymph (talk) 04:25, 18 July 2020 (CDT)

The "uncompleted" footnote becomes inaccurate when extended to multi-map recordings. I see the view that ' &otimes; ' are independent data dimensions, and in fact on DSDA3 they are, but in COMPET-N they aren't (and weren't under AdamH). So I propose changing it to


 * No qualifying run verified and published, as of the most recent Compet-n database update.

If the same footnote is to be used for both databases, then even this is misleading because DSDA verification is largely crowdsourced. Webmasters perform some basic validations, but then an apparently acceptable demo can circulate for years before becoming contested. Whatever text we do adopt for DSDA records, it should be templated, so the bot need not roll out future tweaks. :>

Assuming this overall premise is valid, I don't have a strong opinion on whether you should actually omit the additional rows. If the required booleans are in a SQL table, the bot can incorporate them automatically, but if not, I'd understand if you didn't want to maintain them yourself (I'm not even sure how human users are notified of updates, aside from seeing a new forum thread on doom.com.hr). And because fx02 has the final decision on said flags, nothing stops him from sanctioning the other categories someday, if enough runners participate. :>

P.S. Thank you for retaining the Final Doom complevels footnotes also &mdash; that still confuses people, 20+ years later, and heaven help anyone whose connectivity is too slow to post questions to social media. HTH / KUTGW! Ryan W (living fossil) 10:46, 28 June 2020 (CDT)

\o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/  Ryan W (living fossil) 13:48, 6 July 2020 (CDT)


 * Thanks. A nice side-effect of the scripts were two-way consistency checks: not only did the scripts update various manual data entry slip-ups on the wiki (like swapped digits or MM/DD), but they also revealed some inconsistencies and data mishaps in the main database, which Fx fixed last week(end). --Xymph (talk) 08:01, 10 July 2020 (CDT)

← ← ← To allow further review of the current state of the script, I've updated the test article. The proposed color scheme is in full effect, including the initial totals table to visually link up those numbers of the listed records. The totals per category are added above each column per Jartapran above. And the new PWADs subsection contains a brief summary of a player's other records.

Naturally it's possible to generate a complete table layout (with 7 colors) like for the IWADs, but for some speedrunners (especially Xit Vono, with 249 entries here) that would make for a very long section. Given concerns that the wiki should not completely reproduce the data/statistics of another site, I thought a brief summary may be a suitable compromise, but I'm open to reading other ideas. --Xymph (talk) 15:47, 13 July 2020 (CDT)


 * Additions and updates to record tables for Compet-n players are completed, which wraps up the bulk of this project (until DSDA's API emerges, anyway). I see I missed some suggestions/questions by RyanW from June 22:
 * "Compet-n presents episode runs and movies...tack those records on to the bottom where present" - I summarized those in an "Other records" section analog to the PWADs records summary.
 * "Should an 'all time' column be added" - I see your point but have no idea how to collect all-time records, distinct from the number of submitted demos.
 * "tables are unevenly spaced" - I saw that spacing depends on the window width: the wider the more evenly spaced they are. Not sure what, if anything, can be done here.
 * "runs → styles in the footnote" - Flew under my radar but now updated in the script, so it'll be used in the next update sweep (whenever that'll be).
 * --Xymph (talk) 04:25, 18 July 2020 (CDT)

Changing Template:Cite web
We have these fantastic templates which organize and format information about online sources. I'm trying to extend the functionality as shown here (hopefully that's clear). All four can take a bare URL as a parameter, so this should apply to all four. The test template is being used here.

This might seem too minor for Central Processing, but I didn't create these and haven't used them often, so I'm announcing it for two reasons: If I screw up, this could mass-create 404s which aren't immediately noticed. I don't think I have screwed up (thanks to ExpandTemplates) and don't demand anyone drop what they're doing to test it, but if you agree about the risk, then I encourage you to examine my version. I won't bring it live unless there's feedback or loud silence. :> Templating these links may be incorrect journalism. Style guides tell us to cite the link we actually used, not an intermediary or container (e.g. URL shortener, media embedded in a tweet). If a domain moves, then the link shown in the article will differ from what was accessed on the date given. I can see both sides of this but precedents exist, and we have had so many headaches with link rot that I must support modularization. If someday we need the absolute URL at the time of insertion, we can recover it from the corresponding template revision in 99.9% of cases. So yeah, let me know if I'm worrying about nothing. :> Thanks, Ryan W (living fossil) 05:54, 8 June 2020 (CDT)


 * Seems good to me. --Quasar (talk) 13:20, 25 June 2020 (CDT)

Update: This is now live. Unable to visualize the entire "phase space" of citation styles plus combinations of incomplete parameter calls, I tested further with individual articles already using these templates heavily. To my astonishment, it seemed to work.

If anyone's references begin outputting broken links or other strangeness, just revert me and we'll figure it out later.     Thanks. Ryan W (living fossil) 16:22, 28 June 2020 (CDT)

Handling BTSX release as official add-on
For the release of BTSX, the mod's name was shortened to "BTSX" and all of the level names were changed. I am going to strongly suggest that we create redirects for (and appropriately document) these names and not separate articles, as they are not new maps, they were just renamed&mdash;for that release only&mdash;to avoid legal issues. --Quasar (talk) 13:23, 25 June 2020 (CDT)
 * Redirects created; documentation added. --Gez (talk) 17:43, 25 June 2020 (CDT)
 * Thanks a ton. --Quasar (talk) 17:55, 25 June 2020 (CDT)

"Marked spots on the map" not displaying on wiki?
Hi all,

I'm not sure if it's my browser or I'm just blind, but on the pages for the Doom II levels, the letters which are supposed to display on the maps (and are referred to in the walkthroughs) are not actually there on the map.

For example, here is the map for level 13 of Doom 2:. I don't see any letters there, even though the walkthrough makes explicit reference to them when discussing the secrets.

By contrast, the Hangar map has obvious letters on the image matching the walkthrough text:

Were new images uploaded and the next just never updated to match, or anything like that? Obviously it's not that much of a big deal since I can figure out where the secrets are by just using noclip and process of elimination, but it is strange.

70.30.107.183 14:20, 3 August 2020 (CDT)


 * Nothing's wrong with browser or eyes. Walkthrough, i.e. spotted, maps have been created for nearly two dozen maps (Doom E1, E2M1-5, E2M9, E4M1, Heretic E4M1-5, Doom64 MAP01, and Oniria), using various approaches. It's a very time-consuming process of which so far no part has been automated, although an investigation into those possibilities is still on my to-do list. So this continues to be a human effort which, in this particular aspect of the wiki, happens to occur few and far between. --Xymph (talk) 15:13, 3 August 2020 (CDT)

Voodoo dolls listed under statistic things for deathmatch mode
Example article: MAP02: Down Through (Sunlust)

This may be grasping at straws, but for the generated level stat tables I noticed the "Voodoo doll" row can appear in the Deathmatch table. Should this be excluded given Doom doesn't use the player 1-to-4 starts in deathmatch mode? i.e., Voodoo scripts and crusher / barrel instadeaths don't work.

I noticed the "Cooperative start" row only appears in the Cooperative table so excluding "Voodoo doll" in Deathmatch table makes sense.

... unless a source port exists that allows voodoo dolls to work when the parameter is enabled? I'm not aware of any. --Afterglow (talk) 20:31, 15 August 2020 (CDT)


 * Hello. Sounds like a reasonable question, given that keys are already omitted.  Is this the original discussion?  Maybe nobody thought of it at the time.    Ryan W (living fossil) 13:00, 17 August 2020 (CDT)


 * No, I don't think that ever came up during development & discussion. But it makes sense, so implemented and tested now. Will update all pertaining map pages. --Xymph (talk) 05:38, 20 August 2020 (CDT)

New category suggestion
I am thinking about adding Weapons by type under Weapons, and then creating subcategories there such as Pistols, Rifles, Shotguns, Rocket launchers, Crossbows, etc. The already-existing Demonic weapons would also move under that subcat. Any feedback? --Quasar (talk) 03:35, 31 August 2020 (CDT)
 * Sounds fine. So the category would work across games, e.g. the crossbow category would include Heretic's ethereal crossbow, Strife's electric/poison crossbow, and perhaps DE's ballista? I think the same idea could also be applied to monsters. --Gez (talk) 04:50, 1 September 2020 (CDT)
 * Yeah that's the gist of the idea. --Quasar (talk) 05:42, 1 September 2020 (CDT)
 * If there are enough articles, sure. I guess there's a small chance they attract paragraphs of headcanon.  :>  Would existing subcats move to "Weapons by game"?   Ryan W (living fossil) 11:17, 2 September 2020 (CDT)
 * No problems there. Will add a level of additional granularity. May take some time to get right but if things have to be moved i can always take a look at that. --Redneckerz (talk) 14:25, 2 September 2020 (CDT)

Let's see what we have to work with: So besides the already added pistols, shotguns, double-barreled shotguns, and demonic weapons categories, here's what else we could have: ... I'm not entirely sure what to do with the various rifles/machine guns/chainguns. Light automatic weapons and heavy automatic weapons? Also I kind of feel like the Soul Cube, Unmaykr, and Sigil of the One God could have a category for them, "alien super-weapons" maybe? I don't like that name but they're not demonic. Also I don't know what to do with most of Hacx's weapons. They're various kinds of ill-explained energy weapons (photon zooka shoots photons? So it's just a torchlight?) --Gez (talk) 04:52, 3 September 2020 (CDT)
 * Utility weapons: Probjectile, Flashlight, Ionized Plasma Levitator, Fire extinguisher
 * Improvised weapons: Flashlight, Fire extinguisher, Dog collar
 * Melee weapons: Fist, Axe, Fists (Doom 3), Fist (Doom 2016), Blood punch, Crucible (Doom Eternal), Doomblade, Kick, Staff, Mace of Contrition, Spiked gauntlets, Hammer of Retribution, Timon's Axe, Punch dagger, Hoig Reznator
 * Rocket launchers: the many Doom variants, and Mini-missile launcher
 * Grenades: Grenade, Frag grenade, Siphon Grenade, Demon control grenade, Kinetic mine, Tesla rocket, Frag grenade (Doom Eternal), Ice bomb
 * Grenade launchers: Grenade launcher (2016), BFG Grenade Launcher, Grenade launcher
 * Plasma weapons: the plasma guns/rifles, Stick
 * Electric weapons: Static cannon, Hoig Reznator, Tazer, Arc of Death, Crossbow
 * BFG: BFG9000, BFG 9000 (Doom 3), BFG-9000 (Doom 2016), BFG Grenade Launcher, BFG-9000 (Doom Eternal)
 * Flamethrowers: Flame belch, Flamethrower
 * Crossbows: Ethereal crossbow, Crossbow
 * Magical staves: Hellstaff, Phoenix Rod, Serpent Staff
 * Magical wands: Elven Wand, Sapphire Wand, Bloodscourge, Wraithverge
 * Magical gloves: Dragon Claw, Gauntlets of the Necromancer
 * Magical swords: Crucible (Doom Eternal) (arguably), Quietus
 * Spells: Firestorm, Frost Shards, Arc of Death
 * If we were to go by the taxonomy of real-world weaponry (which is not necessarily a serious suggestion, but let's see where it leads), the various semi- and fully-automatic weapons would fall into the following categories:


 * Long guns (this would actually by definition also include shotguns)
 * Machine guns (definition: fully automatic)
 * Rotary cannons / Gatling guns
 * All chainguns
 * Submachine guns (fully automatic; using pistol-calibre ammo IRL)
 * Machine gun (Doom)
 * Machine gun (Doom 3) - Based on IRL classification of corresponding similar RL weapon
 * Machine pistols
 * Uzi
 * Rifles
 * Selective-fire rifles (multiple firing modes)
 * Carbines (short barrel)
 * Heavy assault rifle
 * Heavy cannon
 * Assault rifle (Doom) - NB: technically. You can let off for one round that's more accurate, or hold down for auto.
 * Assault rifle (Strife) - Similar. Burst fire or automatic.
 * Burst rifle - Explicitly calls itself this accurately
 * Well you can see one problem of course is that Doom has never actually contained a . So that might confuse people. There is also a confusing border, even in IRL, between machine guns and selective-fire rifles at times, to where the categorization might become vague or a topic of conflict. None of this is to mention the dreaded classification of "assault rifle" which is all over the place. --Quasar (talk) 08:26, 3 September 2020 (CDT)

Codex material final straw
So I'm busy for a couple of days and I come back to the entirety of the '16 and Eternal codex contents having been up since the 8th, and not a single one has even been flagged for speedy delete on copyvio grounds, let alone anything done about it. I've really had it with this. I can't put up with it, it is an unacceptable risk to me personally. This is a warning to all mods that I require support with moderation of contents on these grounds, or else there are going to be major changes required to how this site works with respect to new or unregistered contributors. --Quasar (talk) 16:59, 11 September 2020 (CDT)


 * Special thanks to User:TheGreenHerring for stepping up to help with cleanup. --Quasar (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2020 (CDT)


 * Note - I was super frustrated when I made the above post; please don't take it too seriously. I appreciate everybody and apologize for letting myself get too worked up over something that was fixable w/o a major fuss. --Quasar (talk) 20:48, 16 September 2020 (CDT)

Page merges in light of The Ancient Gods, Part One
Given that the DLC confirms beyond all doubt that Samuel Hayden and the Seraphim (as well as VEGA and the Father) are the same person, should we merge their pages together accordingly or allow them to remain as separate pages? I'm not sure which course of action is preferable, given how much of the pages will need to be rewritten either way.--Newlydoomed (talk) 14:21, 20 October 2020 (CDT)
 * And having seen several of the Codex entries as well as some confusion on my part after learning that "Seraphim" is the name of a species rather than an individual, I've had to go back and do significant rewrites to several articles. Any help that could be given would be greatly appreciated. --Newlydoomed (talk) 12:30, 22 October 2020 (CDT)


 * I am personally opposed to this because of the narrative complexity and the already sufficient length of each article involved. If someone has come to the wiki curious about Samuel Hayden, having played Doom '16 only, then they will simply be confused if they arrive at Samur Maykr and will have to put in serious effort to try to separate the two subjects. This isn't even getting into the real-life elements of characterization that are a bit inconsistent either. Some things clearly changed during Eternal's writing phase from what was originally intended. This is best captured if the article takes what '16 says about Hayden at face value and doesn't try to reinterpret it into the lens of what is added later. --Quasar (talk) 05:37, 26 October 2020 (CDT)

wiki upgrade
this wiki lacks various useful templates such as the mention and notification template found in wikipedia i think.Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 07:22, 1 December 2020 (CST)


 * Hello! It's usually possible to fork a Wikipedia template in some form, but it might not remain useful if it relies on specific characteristics of Wikipedia, such as MediaWiki extensions, categorization rules, or a huge editor base with many active admins and bots.  Do you have specific examples in mind?    Ryan W (living fossil) 18:50, 2 December 2020 (CST)
 * Ryan W: the template also known as  templateMussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 06:29, 3 December 2020 (CST)
 * Those seem to be discussion utilities and that's not the primary purpose of this wiki. Editing someone's talk page already gives them a notification, by the way. --Gez (talk) 07:51, 3 December 2020 (CST)
 * On Wikipedia, "notification" implies the added features of the Echo extension which we don't have. So  wouldn't function, and  would create a link without pinging, which seems pedantic to me, but certainly not against any rules.
 * Technical limitations can be overcome if someone throws enough code/cash at them, but I agree with Gez that the issue is qualitative. On-topic discussion is good.  Rapid discussion, and pushing specific users to follow a thread, are social media conventions not aligned with this site's philosophy.    Ryan W (living fossil) 11:48, 3 December 2020 (CST)

Mediafire
So apparently for the coming new year, Mediafire's resolution is to delete all the old files. We have a few links to content hosted on Mediafire, this content is going to be dead links soon. --Gez (talk) 08:21, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 * Okay, I found 10 and 7 links to them, with some overlap and in one case (AIRSTRIP.ZIP) a mirror of a file still available elsewhere. Two (EtD1Setup.exe and resurge_map15_redkey.lmp) are already missing, I downloaded the others for safe-keeping. What would be a suitable hosting solution for the unique ones? --Xymph (talk) 08:49, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 * AIRSTRIK being mirrored on "redarchive" makes me think we might ask Redneckerz to host them? --Gez (talk) 10:36, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 * I covered AIRSTRIK on the DRD Team mirror primarily because of its rarity, so if the Mediafire mirror goes into flames - Well, there is a back up. Same for The Stick Figure which i believe i have backed up aswell. As for the other Mediafire links: Ill be glad to re-host them on DRD Team/RedArchive. I can put them in a special DoomWiki map for that purpose. Is there anything else required besides re-hosting and re-linking? --Redneckerz (talk) 12:06, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 * That would be great. Can't think of anything else, that should suffice. --Xymph (talk) 12:49, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 * Just checking them out, those PlayStation Doom files are going to be troubling with several 100 megabytes a pop. My little DRD Team is/was used for rather files - Rather 20-30 megabytes at most instead of 200-300. I am not sure if that holds up - I have to check my limitations. Ill download them eitherway so i can always upload them but those files might be a problem given their size.--Redneckerz (talk) 13:00, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 * Some of the others are large too, their combined size is 1.9 GB. So if your server is that limited, it would be a problem, yeah. Then you could cover just the other files and we'll look for another solution for those 6 psx ones. --Xymph (talk) 13:16, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 * It should be alright. I just saved them all and ill sync them on the FTP somewhere tomorrow. Ill let you know here if this succeeded. If i have to be frank, the PSXDoom stuff does come from a group whose works, impressive as it is, isn't the most organized, to say the least.--Redneckerz (talk) 15:59, 19 December 2020 (CST)
 * Mirroring and replacement of affected links is now complete. --Redneckerz (talk) 14:23, 20 December 2020 (CST)
 * Wow, thanks all! This is how wiki collaboration is supposed to work &mdash; matching up resources with issues.  Ryan W (living fossil) 14:56, 20 December 2020 (CST)

Copyright vios round 2
I have fully returned. It may be no secret that I was growing frustrated with the rate of incoming contributions that were not carefully sourced. I am currently auditing the backlog of things that need my review and as a result I have identified a few images that require handling ASAP. These are especially some full-page (or near) scans from the Dark Horse Books Art of Doom Eternal; it's a minor miracle I have not received a takedown notice for these. Another I suspect comes from there but have not confirmed; either way the image is unsourced and thus doesn't meet our policy requirements. Round 3 will come if needed and will be added here as I continue reviews. Sorry in advance to anyone who might feel I'm being a "bad guy" by doing this; laws are only getting more draconian by the day&mdash;the US Congress just rammed through a bill that can let people sue you for up to $30k just for uploading images like these&mdash;and we cannot risk the entire site over some book scans. --Quasar (talk) 23:43, 27 December 2020 (CST)

Current problem articles/files

 * All three images deleted, per the reasoning given. &mdash;The Green Herring (talk ) 00:28, 28 December 2020 (CST)
 * All three images deleted, per the reasoning given. &mdash;The Green Herring (talk ) 00:28, 28 December 2020 (CST)
 * All three images deleted, per the reasoning given. &mdash;The Green Herring (talk ) 00:28, 28 December 2020 (CST)
 * All three images deleted, per the reasoning given. &mdash;The Green Herring (talk ) 00:28, 28 December 2020 (CST)